- HTML Translated Version -

 

The Political in Jean Jacque Rousseau

 

Author: Alirio José Abreu Suarez

Ministerio Del Poder Popular Para La Educación, MPPPE

alirioabreu2010@hotmail.com

Valera, Venezuela

 

Abstract

This work is based on a theoretical reflection on the political thought of Jean Jacque Rousseau. It was carried out with a bibliographic and documentary approach. In this sense, the proposed work is based on the works of Rousseau as: The origin of inequalities among men, the Social contract among other authors. Roussonian work is important as it becomes a reference for the field of political science. The purpose of the text is to provide teachers, students and other actors with pedagogical elements to be addressed and discussed in the field of social sciences. In the same way, it is noteworthy the contribution made by Rousseau to politics, his views on the systems of government Democracy, Aristocracy and Monarchy were forceful for the time since later politicians and ideologists are inspired by it to realize the French Revolution and the process of independence in Latin America. Similarly, his harsh criticism of the monarchy corrupts his claim that sovereignty resides in the people through a general will and sets an interesting precedent for current democracies.

 

Keywords: democracy; state; sovereignty.

 

 

 

Lo Político en Jean Jacque Rousseau

 

Resumen

Este trabajo parte de una reflexión teórica sobre el pensamiento político de Jean Jacque Rousseau. El mismo fue efectuado con un enfoque bibliográfico y documental. En ese sentido, el trabajo propuesto se sustenta en las obras de Rousseau como: El origen de las desigualdades entre los hombres, el contrato Social entre otros autores. La obra roussoniana es importante ya que esta se convierte en un referente para el campo de las ciencias políticas. El propósito del texto es proporcionar a los docentes, estudiantes y demás actores elementos pedagógicos para que sean abordados y discutidos en el campo de las ciencias sociales. En la misma forma, es de destacar el aporte efectuado por Rousseau a la política, su visión sobre los sistemas de gobierno Democracia, Aristocracia y Monarquía fueron contundentes para la época ya que posteriormente políticos e ideólogos se inspiran en el para realizar la revolución francesa y el proceso de independencia en Latinoamérica. De igual forma, su dura crítica a la monarquía corrupta su afirmación de que la soberanía reside en el pueblo mediante voluntad general marca un antecedente interesante para las democracias actuales.

 

Palabras clave: democracia; estado; soberanía. 

 

 

 

1. Introduction

The thought of the Swiss politician - French, Jean Jaque Rousseau (1712 - 1778), transcends thanks to his contributions made in his works: The origin of inequalities among men, The social contract, The Emile, The new Eloise, Confessions among others. In that sense, he was a reformer in an inquisitorial society. It is necessary to specify that for the date the monarchy still prevailed. The same considered as an enemy to anyone who made political or educational approaches that could endanger the system of government of the time. In this context, Europe was the center of literary production and Rousseau was the protagonist.

 

This historical period is also known as the century of lights or illustration (XVIII), it is characterized as a European intellectual and cultural movement. Therefore, there were a large number of philosophers, economists, politicians and historians such as: Denis Diderot, Jean Le D 'Alembert, Adam Smith, Emmanuel Kant among others. Each one gave important contributions in the field of Philosophy, politics, economics and Rousseau was no exception.

 

Similarly, Rousseau in the social contract makes severe criticism of political power. His political ideas bother the monarchy, the aristocracy, the nobles, landowners and other institutions of the time. That originates a hatred and persecution to the same seeing itself forced to adopt as Renou name. The Geneva experienced difficult times. His works were burned by the executioners. The unfortunate Rousseau was thrown out of France, hated in Bern detested in Geneva.

          

Rousseau transcends thanks to his magic and literary creativity. His high performance in the world of letters has a high impact on the political and educational. His proposals gave rise to profound changes in the political, the social contract brought as a consequence the inspiration of leaders to make the French revolution in 1789. After that historical fact begins a new stage in the life of Europe. In other words, the end of the monarchy begins as a political system.

 

Rousseau's ideas are inspired by justice, loyalty, work and other values ​​that the human being can acquire in life. Characterized also by being a great reader, writer and musician from an early age he was a lover of Greek classics such as the Republic of Plato and the politics of Aristotle among others. In addition, follower of the political ideas of Voltaire, Locke, Descartes and Leibniz.

 

Summing up the treaty, Rousseau with his works promotes democracy and founds critical thinking. Following Vergara (2012a), he points out: "A new democratic tradition is based on the participatory conception of democracy, based on the principle of popular sovereignty, which has reached an important development in our time" (p.1). Paraphrasing the author, it is clear that political thinking as well as the educational Rousseau remains a reference for all social actors. His contribution to political philosophy made him great not only for the ability to write relevant and forbidden topics. His greatness and main virtue was that he was not wrong in his approaches.

 

2. Development

In the development of the theme, fundamental aspects in the political work of Rousseau will be treated as: His vision on the subject of the rights of man; the sovereign and his role within the State; the State from the Roussonian vision; his vision on the division of governments and the general will as an inalienable right.  

 

2.1. Rousseau's vision of the rights of man

  With regard to human rights, he was in favor of the existence of nations that respect social coexistence and respect. As well as that justice predominates. In that sense, Rousseau in his work The Origin of Inequalities among Men (2006a), states: "I would have chosen a country where the law of legislation was common to all citizens, why, who can know better than they, in what conditions it suits them to live together in the same society?" (p.10). Interpreting the author, it can be said that the inhabitants of a society are in their right to implement or contribute to the political, economic and social development of the nation.

 

Regarding the above, Abreu (2017) says: "There is a series of rights that should not be violated" (p.340). In this regard, political rights are part of the life of man. Rousseau was contrary to the prevailing system. He condemned slavery or servitude in all its spheres since, in the words of Rousseau (2006b), he points out: "Once peoples are accustomed to having masters or lords, they can not then live without them". (page 9) Added to the above, man by nature is a being that in his subconscious is governed by good politicians, bad, efficient or deficient. At the same time, he becomes a slave of his oppressors through the payment of taxes, inefficient services, special contributions, among others.

 

Rousseau, considered society as a great pact where there is an association that protects and defends the entire community. As well as people and their assets. All this under the principle of common freedom, since the people are a group of people associated with an end and the government has the task of safeguarding the popular will. In reference to freedom, he sees it as an inalienable right. Rousseau in his Social Contract (1959a), states: "To renounce his freedom is to renounce his condition as a man, to those of humanity and even to his duties. There is no compensation for those who renounce everything" (p.848). In other words, man must struggle to have freedoms, political, social and economic rights.

 

It is clear that Rousseau's ideas in his social contract were appropriated by the important politicians of modern Europe. The slavery, oppression, degradation of the human being and the lack of fundamental human rights begin to spread and debate to give way to a parliamentary system that would translate into the coming constitutions the rights and guarantees of the people.

 

For her part, Rousseau was a lover of freedom and social justice condemned the oppression, the crimes, the poverty in which the majority lived, while comfort and opulence was a characteristic of kings. Around that Rousseau (1959b), says: "man has been born free and, nevertheless, lives chained everywhere between chains" (p.843). In this regard, the musician, teacher and actor from Geneva was a strong lover of freedom without exceeding the rights and duties of citizens.

 

For his part, Rousseau was a defender of the right to life based on the principle that there is no right whatsoever to remove the existence of people who have been subjected to combat. He considered it preferable to make him a slave while he is released. On the other hand, this approach was embraced in the French revolution in the proclamation on the first fundamental right of man, that right is that of life. In the same way, the author of Emilio was a lover of the natural state of the human being and as such loved peace following Fukuyama (1992), indicates:

Rousseau postulates a state of peaceful nature. Denies that vanity or self-love is natural in man, and argues that the fearful and lonely natural man is essentially peaceful, because his few selfish needs are easily satisfied (p.345).

 

As a complement, it is noteworthy that peace was for Rousseau a permanent desire to be part of human nature, man is born free and does not have to live chained. The politician is not born corrupted, it is the prevailing system that makes him corrupt, inefficient, indolent to the problems of society and especially to the most dispossessed. Likewise, he criticizes in his works the Emilio and the Social Contract to all that governmental apparatus that did not give happiness to the majority but oppression.

 

Faced with this scenario, he defended social pacts as an existential way of human beings. Therefore, in society there must be political, economic, and social pacts where freedom is a reference. He also considered diplomatic relations as an essential part of a country. In this regard, Rousseau (1959c), Manifest:

Find a form of association that defends and protects with common strength the person and the assets of each associate, and by which each one, joining all, does not obey but himself and remains as free as before (p.853).

 

Interpreting the author, the organization in all the exposed areas is a right and obligation of society. In the same way, he states that only in freedom can man live justly, although with some difficulties due to the natural state of man. For this reason, is that the libertarian approach of the Geneva was linked to the nature of man. 

 

2.2. The sovereign and his role within the State from the perspective of Rousseau

          For Rousseau, social pacts are fundamental in any society. These avoid the state of barbarism or primitive, which is none other than the force above the law. In that order, he considered the participation of the sovereign in the construction of regulations in order to establish common rights and duties. In this regard, Rousseau (1959d), states: "Laws are not properly the conditions of the civil association. The people submissive to the laws, must be its author; it corresponds only to those associated with regulating the conditions of society" (p.875). As a complement, the citizen is obliged to participate in the preparation and construction of laws directly and indirectly one of them is making proposals to legislators.

 

       In addition to the above, Rousseau (1959e), states: "Since the laws emanate from the general will, neither the prince is above them, since he is a member of the state" (p.874). That is, the laws have the purpose of establishing social order. In this sense, the monarchies, the high clergy, the military, political or economic leaders can not be exempt from complying with what is established by law.

 

          According to the author, he considered the sovereign as a body capable of generating proposals to transform the monarchical state into a more just social state. Seen in this way Zarka (2005a), states: "The thought of Rousseau is a turn in the very measure in which founds a new concept of sovereignty of the people that will occupy the center of political reflection to this day" (p.2). In other words, Rousseau's ideas were of great impact in the revolutions of the eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth centuries.

 

Also, Rousseau argued that the power of the sovereign is inalienable and indivisible. Therefore, you can not negotiate with the people issues that go against you as the following aspects: the right to be free, express their political and religious ideas and decide everything that has to do with the fate of society. He criticized the politicians of the time for considering the sovereign a body without principles and without training to generate ideas, debates and proposals. Similarly, he argued that force and will were expressed in the legislative and executive powers respectively. What was translated into tax and war something that attacked the sovereign.

 

In the same way, he considered that the sovereign is a right body in his behavior since he generally wants the common good. Following the approach Rousseau (1959f), says: "The people never get corrupted, but often cheated, and that's when they seem to want evil" (p.866). According to the author, the sovereign also has weaknesses because, due to his nature as a man, his aspirations are frustrated by unscrupulous politicians, which leads him to take actions such as rebellion and disobedience. Also it is possible to emphasize that the sovereign is frustrated when the social pact is broken.

 

2.3. The State from Rousseau's vision

With respect to the State, Rousseau defined him as a person who has to have morals and who lives with his peers. This leads to the union of its members. In the conformation of the State, several social factors participate, in it there must be a social pact that regulates the coexistence among the citizens. In this way, individuals conform and they nourish themselves from the earth.

 

It should be noted that Rousseau proposes a State that is governable and, in order to fulfill that objective, it must not be too big or too small. In this sense, the first of these requires many economic resources and also a large number of men in the service of the State to contain the revolts or rebellions. It is also essential to hire labor with high salaries for government matters. Consequently, a giant state in territorial extensions is maintained only with the surcharge of taxes on the people, which generates a decline in their quality of life.

 

On the contrary, a small State is difficult to sustain because of the few economic or human resources that it has, but at the same time it has the advantage that the population has many things in common which makes that there is a sense of belonging and love for the nation. In addition to the above, Rousseau (1959g) says:

A thousand reasons show that this principle. First, the administration becomes more difficult the greater the distances, just as a greater weight is placed at the end of a large lever. Become even more burdensome as the degrees multiply, for each city as each district has its own, which the town pays; then the great governments, the satrapies, the viceroyalties, which must be paid more dearly as one ascends, and always at the expense of the unfortunate people; and finally the supreme administration that consumes everything (p.882).   

  

According to the aforementioned, the tax charged to the sovereign does not translate into improving the services or life of the taxpayers. According to the author, there is a bureaucratic apparatus that consumes everything contributed by the citizen. As well as, a waste of economic resources in extravagances, luxuries, security among other aspects. In accordance with what Rousseau proposed, he justified a State that could be maintained without the need for the sovereign to bear the burden of its maintenance. He also considered that the government is an intermediate body that is established by the subjects the sovereign and the subjects in charge of enforcing laws and civil and political freedom.

 

In the same order of ideas, for Rousseau the government is made up of magistrates also known as kings or executive power. The same He considered that for a government to be good first has to be strong as the population grows. At the same time, he argued that the people and government should contain their actions mutually.

 

In the same way, the government must distinguish itself from the other powers of the State by being the managing director of the economic resources. That is to say, the State will always exist on its own and the government owes itself to the sovereign who is the one who places it in that function so that it fulfills transitory functions in the political power for and for society. All members of a government must act and respond according to the functions for which they have been placed.

 

For Rousseau the government must enjoy good health or credibility within the town that makes governance easier. The rulers are loaned for a specific time because when a government lasts a long time it tends to corrupt itself and use unscrupulous techniques and strategies to continue to hold power. In this sense, the sovereign becomes a controller of the policies used by men as a function of government. There are two related statements of what is government according to Rousseau: The first related to the exercise of popular will or sovereign what translates to legitimate government and the second that the supreme administration is due only to a mandate of the sovereign.   

       

2.4. Rousseau and his vision on the division of governments

          Rousseau condemns political power in the hands of one man. In this regard, Rousseau (1959h), states: "when the government is in the hands of one man, the fusion of the popular will and the general will is perfect, and therefore it reaches a greater degree of intensity" (p.897). That is to say, when a single person takes hold in the function of government, there is room for struggles or rebellions of citizens since they only want a common good that is social participation in matters concerning their nation.

 

For his part, Rousseau as a scholar of political science and inspired by the ideas of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Montesquieu, Voltaire, among others, makes a historical analysis of the governments that have existed throughout history. All this takes to make a classification of the division of governments as follows: Democracy, aristocracy and monarchy.

 

In the first place, democracy is for Rousseau the participation of the people in terms of the direct election of their representatives in the government or what is the same their free self-determination in the affairs of their country. In the democratic state, the majority has the right to decide the destiny of the country through the vote. For Vergara (2012b), "The Russian democratic state is the people who become a collective subject that governs itself. The act of association gives him his unity, his common self, his life and his will" (p.1). In other words, the popular will is irreversible and inalienable. Rousseau (1959i) states: "If there were a people of gods, it would be ruled democratically. Such a perfect government does not suit men" (p.902). That is, democracy is the right system because it is what allows social participation with all and the weaknesses that can be attributed.

 

Second, the aristocracy according to the Geneva is a system of government in which the power of it is in a few hands so this can lead to tyranny and corruption. In this sense, this system is quite old and the first societies were governed aristocratically participating in the same council of elders, patriarchs, senate among others.

 

Rousseau (1959j) states: "This form of government has two very different moral persons; the government and the sovereign and, therefore, two general wills, one in relation to all the citizens, the other, in relation to the members of the administration only" (p.902). To paraphrase the author, the aristocracy is a small group that governs the fate of many. It interacts with the will of the tiny and tiny number of people who govern, make laws, are judges, military chiefs, administrators of public finances, among others.

 

Third, the monarchy is the power to govern in a single person to what Rousseau also called magistrate and other men receive their unique will, also called real government. As for that system, there are weaknesses since historically they have made governance pacts. Rousseau (1959k), says: "the monarchy is also susceptible of some participation" (p.899). In view of the above, it is necessary to specify that when the extensions of a nation are too large, they can bring negative consequences of governability. Around this, some agreements are necessary to guarantee their permanence.

 

          With regard to the previous approach, it is obvious that Rousseau was a serious critic of the monarchical system of government, considering that it was based on the concentration of political power in a man and, therefore, did not represent the sovereign nor the popular will. Similarly, he did not see with good eyes that the monarch had justice at will and that a large population was governed by the hand of an individual.

 

In that sense, these postulates brought serious consequences for the author of the social contract which spent much of his life in anonymity. Likewise, Rousseau (1959l) points out: "Kings wish to be absolute, and from afar they are shouted that the best way to do it is to make them love their people" (p.905). That is to say, I consider that the monarchs are flattered and they pretend to love the people, but unfortunately they will always make fun of them in the courts.

 

          From the proposed idea, the great spirit of democracy and courage of Rousseau is corroborated. He condemned the internal struggles from the bosom of the monarchies to hold political power because they did not consider themselves worthy of governing. The absence of a monarch who for reasons of health, death and inability to be a prince should not allow for the throne to be hereditary, but on the contrary it must be the people who through free choice choose their successor. At the same time, I argue that anyone who is linked to the monarchy can not be king since this requires: work, commitment, wisdom and patience among other aspects. These elements of what a large number of monarchs lacked throughout history. 

 

2.5. The general will as an inalienable right from the perspective of Rousseau

In the period of illustration or eighteenth century, also known as the century of lights, there were voices against monarchies as a prevailing system in Europe. This is the beginning of the decadence of the kings of the modern age. One of those voices that was pronounced with more force was without a doubt that of Rousseau. He said that in societies the people should play a leading role in the election of their ruler and approve and disapprove laws, that they have to do for the common good as stated by the author of Emilio. In that sense, the vote is a way to that end.

 

It should be noted that everything related to events that may influence the lives of people have to be consulted with the population. Rousseau was in favor of taking the voice of the people into consideration for the execution of regulations or instruments of a legal nature. A mechanism for that is the vote in a free and voluntary way, at the same time, raised that the popular expression has to be considered and respected without placing objections to it. Likewise, Rousseau (1959m), states: "the simple right to vote in every act of sovereignty, a right that no one can wrest from citizens, and that of giving opinions, proposing, dividing and discussing" (p.935). Following the author's idea, the vote is the way to express agreements disagreements with the rulers.

 

Similarly, Rousseau argued that the indestructibility of majorities is a fact since the people are the ones who must demonstrate in relation to the appointment of princes, kings, legislators and others. According to Zarka (2005b), he says: "With Rousseau, the sovereignty of the people provides the only legitimate and valid concept of sovereignty, as can be shown both in relation to the terms of the social contract, and with the concept of the general will" (p.8). Paraphrasing the author, it can be mentioned that the political power acquires a deep legitimacy when there is the participation of the sovereign in terms of the election of the government.

 

Likewise, and referring to the popular will of Vergara (2012c), he states: "The Russian democratic State is the people that have become a collective subject that governs itself" (p.1) Interpreting the stated, the popular will is a reality of the democracies in these systems is where there is the participation and manifestation of the majorities that place a minority to direct the affairs of government.

 

In the same way, the author of the New Eloísa considered the acts of electing the rulers as a difficult fact, although it seems simple. The people tend to be wrong and for that reason do not choose the most appropriate. It raised that the monarchs and representatives of the cameras have to be elected by popular will. At the same time, they must use a methodology that is in accordance with the reality of the country since the nations are of different political, social, cultural and economic contexts. Reaffirming the previous approach. Smith (2008), indicates:

Rousseau also supports his thesis of the infallibility of the general will from the organic theory with which he tries to demonstrate that the proper functioning of a State depends, like a body, to be directed by a single will, that is, by the will itself of the sovereign people as the head of the political body that forms and that, as such, can never have any other interest than that of the body itself (p.38).

 

In relation to the above, the political ideas of Rousseau were the reaffirmation of a state that has as an aim the happiness of the majorities where the laws, people, life, popular will, property, acts or social pacts are respected, among others. It is the people who determine through the vote as an instrument to designate who is going to occupy a permanent or transitory function of the destiny of the public administration. In that sense, the political thought of the Geneva is to give the sovereign participation to be master of their own destiny through popular elections where all sectors are included without exception.  

 

3. Reflexión final

The political work of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, historically was without a doubt one of the most transcendental during the period of enlightenment. Currently Rousseau is considered one of the fathers of democracy that the world knows today, his text The social contract is the instrument that was studied by other political notables and leaders of the French Revolution such as: Maximilian Robesspiere, Jean-Paul Marat, George Danton , among others.

 

In the same way, Rousseau's proposal on human rights as: life, vote, sovereignty, democracy and freedom between are still debated in the world of political science and political philosophy. Although these approaches were not new to him, he is given the greatest credit for generating transformations of a political order in contemporary Europe.

 

Similarly, the Rousonian theoretical model proposed in The Social Contract, gives a rational explanation of human relations. Where man has a relationship with the State through political associations. Therefore, Rousseau had to socialize people of the modern age and subsequent chronological contexts.

 

In the same order of ideas, Rousseau started from the principle that in order to live in a fairer society, the human being has to live the natural state. In other words, not to be corrupted or to be an individualist since man is good by nature and society is the one that corrupts him. He proposed that man is perfectible as he becomes aware of what is good for a nation or not.

 

Likewise, starting from a moral of the general will, an idea that Rousseau introduces to the political field, is a reference for contemporary societies. In the Rousonian world, complementarity between man and society is a necessary relationship since none can be isolated from the context in which it is immersed. However, Rousseau was not understood by many, he was attacked, persecuted, slandered and expelled from some countries unjustly by the political and ecclesiastical leaders. His thoughts and ideas were perhaps very advanced so they were not accepted for the time. His works: The social contract, The origin of inequalities among men, El Emilio, The new Eloísa among others, make it a great analyst in the field of political science.

 

Today the political ideas of Jean Jacques Rousseau, are studied in various universities around the world. His contribution to politics is significant since there were concrete outcomes that were inspired by his work such as: the French Revolution and the independence processes of Latin America and the Caribbean. Many may agree or disagree with their thinking, but what is certain is that Rousseau's contribution was fundamental in the political and ideological transformation of a considerable number of countries. Therefore, humanity owes this thinker being the father of modern democracies.

 

4. References

Abreu, A. (2017). La Ética en la Investigación Educativa. Revista Scientific, 2(4), 335-350. Recuperado de: https://doi.org/10.29394/scientific.issn.2542-2987.2017.2.4.19.338-350

 

Fukuyama F. (1992). El fin de la Historia y el último hombre. Colombia: Editorial Planeta.

 

Rousseau J. (1959a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l,m). Obras selectas de Juan Jacobo Rousseau. Argentina: Editorial Ateneo.

 

Rousseau, J. (2006a,b). El origen de las desigualdades entre los hombres.  Bogotá: Ediciones Universales.

 

Smith A. (2008). Estado y Democracia en el Pensamiento Político de Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Santo Domingo, República Dominicana: Instituto filosófico Pedro Francisco Boná. Recuperado de: https://www.memoireonline.com/02/12/5369/m_Estado-y-democracia-en-el-pensamiento-politico-de-Jean-Jacques-Rousseau4.html

 

Vergara J. (2012a,b,c). Democracia y participación en Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Revista de Filosofía. Volumen 68, págs. 29-52.  Recuperado de: http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0718-43602012000100004

 

Zarka, C. (2005a,b).  Rousseau y la soberanía del pueblo. Revista Derechos y Libertades, Número 15, Época II, págs. 47-63. Recuperado de: https://www.dykinson.com/cart/download/articulos/3281/

 

 

Alirio José Abreu Suarez

e-mail: alirioabreu2010@hotmail.com

 

Born on December 3, 1966 in Valera, Trujillo state, Venezuela. Bachelor in integral education mention social sciences in the Universidad Nacional Experimental Simón Rodríguez. Specialist in planning and educational evaluation Universidad Valle del Momboy. Specialist in education for community recreation graduated from the Universidad de Pamplona (Colombia). University Experience: teacher at the Universidad Deportiva del Sur, professor at the Universidad Politécnica de las Fuerzas Armadas. Currently an active teacher in the Ministry of Popular Power for Education, classification V. Workplace Escuela Primaria Bolivariana Caja de Agua attached to NER175, located in Motatán, Trujillo State, Venezuela and Doctor in Education at the Universidad Nacional Experimental “Rafael María Baralt”.

 

The content of this manuscript is disseminated under a Creative Commons License Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International

 

- Original Version in Spanish -

DOI: https://doi.org/10.29394/Scientific.issn.2542-2987.2018.3.8.1.20-38